Doctrine is defined as the substance of the faith or teachings

This gives me great pain, but enough is enough.  I have grown weary of being vilified by a person who should know better.  I’ve tried being more circumspect, but today was over the top.  This is a direct quote.

We must remember that we are called into a relationship with a Person, not a doctrine. Heb. 1:3. Jesus was the exact representation of God while here on earth. When you look at the life of Jesus, the way He treated people, you see nothing but love, kindness, and mercy. The only hard words Jesus had for anyone were for the religious leaders, who were turning people away from God. ~ Dr. James B. Richards

Thanks *** for this!  I know too many people that need to be reminded of this!!!

First, do not be mislead that this quote has anything to do with Hebrews 1:3.  Here is that verse. 

He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,

I will await anyone at any time showing me one verse from any place in the Bible that says, “we are called into a relationship with a Person, not a doctrine.” Any time and any place you can find this verse, email me, text me or be as openly tactless as this post.  This verse does not exist in the Bible.

So, what about Dr. Richards?  He thinks that Jesus never treated anyone except for religious leaders with anything but love, kindness and mercy.  Two things can be stated with confidence based upon this assertion.  First, Dr. Richards has never heard of the Law and Gospel distinction, has never read Martin Luther, and has no clue about the content of the Council of Trent.  Secondly, Dr. Richards believes that because he asserts something, everyone will accept it as the truth, because his word is equal to that of Jesus and His prophets and His Apostles.  What do I mean?  Let’s see.

Jesus was the exact representation of God while here on earth.  I’m not sure what Dr. Richards means by this.  I thought Jesus actually was God while here on earth, as He was before and He is now.  Jesus was also wholly human.  This statement of Dr. Richards almost sounds like docetism.  But let’s move on in this statement.  In other ways, it is in error.  Let’s talk about what Jesus actually said.

Matthew 5 is commonly talked about in terms of the Beatitudes.  The second half of the chapter is the rest of the Law.  Jesus is doing what God does in Matthew 5.  He is dispensing blessings and curses.  This is what God does, and His audience in that time knew this.  He was treading on dangerous ground.  Jesus wasn’t killed because He did miracles.  He was killed because He forgave sins, openly, publicly and in no one’s name but His own.  The Jews viewed this as blasphemy.  Look at Matthew 5:48.  You must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.  Thanks, much, Jesus.  Under the Law, in order to have salvation, we must be perfect.  This is what he told people.  That is not mercy; that is justice.  Move on to John 6:60-70.  He tells His disciples that no comes to Him unless it is granted them by the Father.  Many leave Him at that moment.  Then He invites the twelve to leave as well.  Those are very hard Words in most people’s opinion.  Was the rich young ruler just a parable or did that really happen?  Were not those Words spoken to that young man very hard?  And so another comment says that the difference was that Jesus was "in relationship" with his disciples!  Really?  First, where does the Bible say that???  Second, what kind of a relationship it is when so many disciples left Him that day???  Please, please, please, read first.  Learn.  Assertion without the knowledge to back it up is just plain dangerous.  It is the tool of the enemy.

Were the Jewish leaders turning people away from God?  This is a tough question to be sure.  The answer is both yes and no.  They attempted to turn people away from Jesus, but towards the Father.  In a technical sense, I would agree with Dr. Richards on this point.  The Triune God is NOT the same god as the God of Israel that does not contain all three Persons of the Trinity.  But I wonder if Dr. Richards means the Triune God?  After his statements, is it fair to assume that his meaning of god is the same as the Biblical meaning of God?  I’m not sure.

Finally, what is doctrine?  What does the word mean?  Let’s go to wiki:  Doctrine is the set of what is taught by the Bible; doctrine is the statement of the Christian faith.  There are 28 specific references to sound doctrine in the New Testament epistles.  Perhaps this is a little more important than a relationship.  Perhaps this relationship of which you speak, that has absolutely NO references in the Bible, should stand far behind sound doctrine.  Perhaps this spiritual warfare of which you speak should be reexamined.  If your weapons do not include truth, righteousness, faith, salvation and the Word of God, then either you are not using the correct weapons, or you are fighting the wrong side of the fight.  If the target of your fight isn't bad doctrine, perhaps you need to reread Ephesians, particularly chapter 4.

I am indeed weary.  Luckily, the true sacrament of Communion through which Grace will be given me, I will once again receive in two days time.   

To deny doctrine is to deny the Bible.  To deny doctrine is to deny God.  What we are taught by the Word is called doctrine.  Doctrine is the content of the faith.  That is the definition of doctrine.  If you deny the things that Jesus, His prophets and His apostles teach, then you deny Jesus.  How much more plain can this be?

--Ogre--